list_charts

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states what is listed, not behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, if there are rate limits, ordering, or completeness (e.g., 'returns all charts without pagination').

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence (12 words), front-loaded with the action 'List'. No extraneous information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a parameterless tool with an output schema (not shown), the description adequately states purpose and return fields. It could be improved by confirming it returns all charts and no pagination, but it is sufficiently complete for its simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are no parameters (0 params), so the description does not need to add meaning to parameters. The mention of returned fields provides useful context beyond the empty schema. Baseline 4 for zero parameters is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'built-in editorial charts'. It also specifies the returned fields (key, name, backing playlist id). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_chart' which likely retrieves a single chart.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for listing all built-in charts, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives (e.g., 'get_chart' for a specific chart). No exclusion or context is provided beyond the basic action.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.